this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2023
371 points (98.2% liked)

News

23376 readers
4106 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
rjc@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
JonsJava@lemmy.world
gedaliyah@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
jeffw@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
371
Off-duty Alaska Airlines pilot charged with attempted murder after trying to stop engines mid-flight (www.nbcnews.com)
submitted 1 year ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
67 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 141 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The FAA sent alerts to airlines after the Horizon Air incident saying “a validated jump seat passenger attempted to disable aircraft engines while at cruise altitude by deploying the engine fire suppressions system.”

This is what I was looking for. From the title it seems like he just tried to throttle down but he was looking to incapacitate the engines. If he was successful it would have meant the airplane would have been in a glide without power. It seems likely as a pilot he'd know when to do this in a flight too to remove good chances of a safe landing. Truly terrifying!

[–] sebinspace@lemmy.world 57 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Great, now jump seats are fucken ruined

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'd think that in the majority of emergency situations, having an extra person who knows what's going on in the cockpit would be more of a benefit than a risk. Especially given that one of the actual fight crew could decide to go all murder suicide on their flight, and unless the odds of any pilot doing this is greater than 50%, the more people in the cockpit, the more people to fight the bad ones off and take control of the plane and monitor things that would need monitoring in the event that someone successfully disables the engines.

[–] Dultas@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Majority, probably not. Most emergency checklists are going to assume the cockpit crew is the normal count and throwing an extra person is is going to cause more harm than good. The only exception I can think of is UA Flight 232 which while tragic probably would have been worse without someone else in the cockpit.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, I should have said, "the cases when the extra person is a benefit are probably more common than the cases where the extra person attempts to murder the crew and/or crash the plane".

[–] EmpathicVagrant@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

This was how I read your previous comment.

[–] derf82@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I doubt it. Aviation would grind to a halt is pilots and flight attendants can’t commute in jump seats. Besides, this guy was a captain. He could have done the same thing as a pilot, much like the Germanwings flight several years ago.

[–] Tangent5280@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Grind to a halt? Can't they just reserve one seat in premium economy or wherever is closest to the cockpit for jump passengers?

[–] derf82@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That would cost airlines a ton and raise airfare for everyone. As it is the jumpseats are only used when the aircraft if full.

And all for what, pulling someone that will just be in a cockpit later in the day or the next day?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Xyre@lemmus.org 3 points 1 year ago

But what about their profits?!

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm not so sure about that. The only thing more important that security to airline companies is "money". Having to charter flights or wait for availability of their own flights to move staff around would be CRAZY expensive. I have full faith that airlines will look the other way on this one to avoid that cost to the companies.

[–] SheeEttin@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe they'll just start putting them in cabin seats like the rest of us.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They already do that. However, if all the passenger seats are full (which isn't uncommon) there is usually at least 1 but sometimes multiple jump seats on aircraft that allow airlines to move around pilots and other crew members to different airports. Airlines usually let other airlines fly their competitors staff because they also reciprocate when they need it.

Restricting the crew seats to just unsold passenger seats will likely have a huge impact to operations and ALL the different airlines' bottom lines.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 57 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Well, he's fucked. 83 counts of attempted murder will send him into the Stratosphere of jail time. He's gonna wish he just ate a bullet and fucked off by himself.

[–] hiddengoat@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago

Narcissistic AND too much of a pussy to suck a shotgun. Great combo.

[–] brygphilomena@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Depends on if they run concurrently or sequentially.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 49 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

If we gave people who don't want to be here anymore access to safe, effective, painless, suicide, desperate people wouldn't have to resort to desperate methods of opportunity that can harm others.

We aren't willing to be a society. We could not be more clear on that point. Visit one of your local tent cities where we leave defective capital batteries to die of exposure and police harassment if you're still hazy on this fact. We aren't willing to help the struggling in anything but empty rhetoric about how, lol, compassionate we consider ourselves. The least we could do is offer an out that doesn't cause a scene or externalized death. Hell, turn it into an industry let our capitalist owners profit more off of it, win/win.

Inb4 "this bastard tried to kill others, they deserve no mercy!" yeah, when you're suicidal, you aren't exactly able to think outside your own pain, even more reason not to continue to let death by gun purchase be the current gold standard of American suicide.

[–] BottleOfAlkahest@lemmy.world 49 points 1 year ago (10 children)

While I agree that most of the talk about helping those struggling is empty I think it's a bit disingenuous to imply suicide by airplane was the only option available to him. This happened in America were there are almost as many guns as people. Hurting others during a suicide attempt by trying to crash a plane is a choice.

We definitely need better mental health resources but killing 83 other people wasn't his only option.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

This America, buy a gun.

Or find a bridge.

Or Google the "best" ways and pick one.

This is something different. Either wannabe mass shooter who didn't think he had the skills to get the body count he wanted, or he wanted his name to stick around longer than the 30 secs that the names of shooters do these days, or he was mad at his employer and wanted to hurt them...or....

Point is, he didn't just want to kill himself, he wanted to do it while causing a standout mass casualty event.

Edit: I do want to add that it's at least possible he had an immediate acute psychiatric issue e.g. Schizophrenic break and thought the plane was full of aliens, or something along those lines.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] genericuser3532523@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

“Defective Capital Batteries”. That’s good

[–] oatscoop@midwest.social 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Seriously, fuck the FAA.

They just recently allowed pilots to take anti-depressants ... except they're older medications that all have frequent unpleasant side effects like "inability to have an orgasm". ADHD -- tough shit, can't take those meds and keep your license. Any medication that "has an effect on the central nervous system" is banned apart from a short list.

All it does is encourage pilots to lie or forgo treating their very treatable conditions.

[–] whatwhatwutyut@midwest.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As someone with ADHD... What the fuck? Driving without my meds is much more dangerous because EVERY sensory input is jumping into my attention span. Much easier to focus on important things while on meds

[–] oatscoop@midwest.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It used to be you could have never been diagnosed with ADHD -- but don't worry! Now the rules say you just can't currently have ADHD or have taken medication for it in the past 4 years.

And yes, these rules also apply to private pilot licenses. That being said, how may professional pilots do you think have mild/moderate ADHD and have to "suck it up" because they want to keep their jobs?

Makes complete sense, especially considering you can have a pacemaker and still get cleared by an AME to fly.

[–] whatwhatwutyut@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago

Oh man, guess that anyone with ADHD should just try not having it if they want to be a pilot!

I want to believe that the rule is there to not bar people who were incorrectly diagnosed in the past but... I wouldn't put it past them to believe ADHD can be "cured" or "gotten over"

[–] ricdeh@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What a shitty take. No amount of suicidal thoughts or emotional disturbance he had could've justified the murder of 83 innocent people, all with their own lives, loved ones, experiences... You are trying to justify their eradication by saying that it's excusable to kill people if you are depressed.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 33 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In a second notification, the FAA clarified that the security event is not connected to current world events.

I'm curious about how they determined this.

[–] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Skin tone, probably.

[–] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago

Yea, that's what the world needs; More pointless hate and racism. :(

[–] SatanicNotMessianic@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Has anyone said anything about a motive yet? I haven’t seen anyone say why they think he tried to do it.

[–] PseudoSpock@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Has anyone said anything about a motive yet?

Surely, you can't be serious!

[–] Wrench@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

I am serious, and don't call me Shirley

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] foggy@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Can you imagine if he successfully stopped the engines and the pilots safely glided to a landing?

[–] naalo@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Okay, I imagined it. What next?

[–] SmoothLiquidation@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Now, rotate a cow in your mind.

[–] amansman@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Assume a perfectly spherical cow.

[–] SmoothLiquidation@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Can it be in a vacuum?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] aninnymoose@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Rotating is too much work. It’ll be right side up in the end anyway so I didn’t do it. Now what?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Cool right? Those pilots are heroes.

[–] Chetzemoka@startrek.website 9 points 1 year ago

They'd have had a fight on their hands probably. FedEx 705 all over again:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Express_Flight_705

[–] EatYouWell@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'm pretty sure all commercial airplanes have to be able to do this. And I'm even more sure that a gliding landing is part of their aircraft certification training

[–] derf82@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

All aircraft can glide, of course. They also have a ram air turbine to power control surfaces even with engine or APU power. And it has been done before such as Air Canada Flight 143 (the famous Gimli Glider), and Air Transat Flight 236 (the Azores glider)

But you can generally at best go 12 times your altitude, so even at cruise altitude, you need somewhere within 60 miles or so to put down. It certainly would have been far harder to put down unpowered.

[–] m_randall@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

Yea. Planes can glide. Airline checkrides don’t typically include gliding.

load more comments
view more: next ›